Okay, so, some people seem to be learning the wrong lesson from 2016 and 2024, especially in regards to identity politics and wokeism. I dont deny there is a contingent of idpol that is just incendiary and inflammatory to people at face value, but I don't think that's true of all people. A lot of people, for example, seem to be moving in some weird direction where like, say, AOC 2028 bad because she's "woke." No, AOC 2028 good because she's economically progressive. Is she also socially progressive? Yeah. Will that alienate SOME voters? Maybe. Will it alienate all voters? probably not.
I mean, I talk about identity politics and wokeism a lot on this blog. I'm basically a full on "anti woke leftie." But let me explain why that is.
In 2016, I went into the election cycle wanting large scale economic change. A "new new deal" if you will, made up of some combination of UBI, universal healthcare, and free college/student loan forgiveness. I wasnt opposed to other policies too. Unlike what some people say, I ain't opposed to some level of compromise in practice, BUT....the problem is, the democrats didnt even try.
Hillary Clinton went in a different direction. She downplayed economic concerns. She was antagonistic to my priorities and my goals. She leaned into identity politics. She started calling us "bernie bros" for being white men more interested in economic change, than their BS, and I stand guilty as charged and don't give AF. She accused me of being sexist because i wouldnt support her. No, I have nothing against a woman president, if the woman is running on the right platform. And you know what? If AOC ran for president, I would support her. I don't think she's perfect. Ive criticized her in the past (ive criticized all my "idols" in politics tbqh, no one agrees with me on everything), but I still think she's one of the best people for the job. because at the end of the day, is she gonna look out for me and my interests? To some reasonable degree, yes. I dont see her as on the UBI train, but other than that? yeah, she's based.
The problem with identity politics is the fact that it was used as a cudgel to bully me out of supporting my interests. Like, we can't have economic progress until we have social progress. White males are just gonna have to learn to check their privilege and put everyone else's priorities first. You better vote for us, because think of how your vote affects other people blah blah blah. basically, F U, F your interests, you better vote for us or else. You must submit to our ideology and sacrifice your priorities on the altar of white male liberal guilt.
As long as the issue of identity politics and economic progressivism is an either or proposition, then yeah, people are gonna reject identity politics and social progressivism. Because you can't force people to care, and you have to meet voters where they're at. Not condescend and lecture to them. Sure, you might lose some voters who somehow put identity causes like ermahgerd trans healthcare in prisons or something above their own economic interests. but to my knowledge, those people are a minority, and they're idiots. I saw a graphic today about the top issues of the election. 1 was inflation, 2 was illegal immigration, and 3 was jobs. That's where Americans' heads were at. It was mostly kitchen table issues, with a side of racism and xenophobia, but even then, there are real reasons why voters would be against illegal immigrants. They fear illegal immigrants compete with them economically for jobs. They fear that they get public benefits they do not. They fear that they commit crimes. A lot of these narratives are BS, but still, there is some real economic anxiety there, and I ain't opposed to running to the middle there, which Harris did.
So...to me, we need an economically populist democrat who is moderate on immigration. Maybe AOC would fail to some extent there, but still, if you want someone who will deliver the goods, she's the right person for the job. After all, the problem with the immigration issue is that it's theater. You gotta look tough on that issue, but at the end of the day, it's not a big deal. Just...do what you gotta go to look tough and triangulate and deliver on issues.
Maybe AOC wouldnt appear that way, idk. But you know what? bernie's too old and I really struggle to find a better alternative. maybe Nina Turner? But even then the dems destroyed her career for speaking out against a sitting democratic president who was allegedly super popular...even though he had to abandon his campaign 3/4 of the way through election season after he secured the nomination....because he wasn't popular...
The fact is, can we NOT give in to latent racism and think someone who happens to not be white male is suddenly a flagrant far leftist on all social issues? Some of the most economically progressive people in the democratic party are racial minorities and women, often both. I might be willing to admit there would be a problem with say, Rashida Tlaib after the whole palestine thing (seriously that was cringe and she stuck her neck out in a way i can't advise a candidate with national ambitions would do). But unless you go that far, i dont think its a problem.
Like really, if you hate candidates who arent white males who offer the same positions as white males, maybe the problem is actually you? Just saying. Either way. I dont think harris's problem was that, and I don't think AOC would have that much of an issue either. People just want solutions, and keep in mind, the people trump most gained support with were....POC voters, and women, and young people, the demographics that normally go toward democrats. That's where we failed. And it was because of a lack of appealing to economic interests.
Which was the exact problem with the bros, at least where we were a decade ago. Maybe the new gen Z bros are cut from a different cloth because they're young, dumb, and full of you know what, and dating is a nightmare for them because feminism clearly is overreaching. So maybe they got a point there. Still, I think if you run a campaign on improving one's material interests, it doesnt matter what race or gender you are, i think people will respond positively toward that.
Democrats need to actually push for policies that markedly improve peoples' lives. Not limited tinkering around the edges while simultaneously promising rich suburbanites their taxes aren't going up. That's where the real problem with democratic strategy is.
No comments:
Post a Comment